comp.lang.chttps://groups.google.com/d/forum/comp.lang.c
Discussion about C.enRe: Stumped on the role of a particular statement in a program with Arrays & Nested For Loopshttps://groups.google.com/d/msg/comp.lang.c/VelgK7gs9DU/rymHlvXTAQAJ
I should also add - they are sure to charge interest on my mortgage every day, even though I only pay it once a month. Because as soon as they charge it, it becomes a receivable asset. -- ================== Remove the "x" from my email address Jerry Stuckle jstu...@attglobal.nethttps://groups.google.com/d/topic/comp.lang.c/VelgK7gs9DU
Jerry StuckleSat, 10 Dec 2016 05:16:11 UTCRe: absence of maxhttps://groups.google.com/d/msg/comp.lang.c/AWkDRgWybUg/Z4LSkNPTAQAJ
Sorry, I did mean Unix. And even though Linux was a clean-room implementation, it pretty much carried over the same concepts. Both even had man pages and bash shells (or was it sh shell? Been too long - I don't remember exactly). I had very little trouble adjusting to Linux when I got it -https://groups.google.com/d/topic/comp.lang.c/AWkDRgWybUg
Jerry StuckleSat, 10 Dec 2016 05:13:45 UTCRe: Stumped on the role of a particular statement in a program with Arrays & Nested For Loopshttps://groups.google.com/d/msg/comp.lang.c/VelgK7gs9DU/Usxa943TAQAJ
Actually, it's a bit more insidious than that. By calculating it daily, they add to their assets. When they add it to their customers' accounts, it becomes a payable item. Doing it this way allows them to "float" the money and use it for other things (like investments). A bit shady, but ahttps://groups.google.com/d/topic/comp.lang.c/VelgK7gs9DU
Jerry StuckleSat, 10 Dec 2016 05:08:46 UTCRe: Stumped on the role of a particular statement in a program with Arrays & Nested For Loopshttps://groups.google.com/d/msg/comp.lang.c/VelgK7gs9DU/OO1OhQzTAQAJ
Yes, which is why packed decimal data types exist. U.S. banks will go to 4 places past the cents, and large ones need to go to at least 99 billion. So the maximum would be 99,999,999,999.999999 - requiring more precision than has been available for many decades. But packed decimal nativelyhttps://groups.google.com/d/topic/comp.lang.c/VelgK7gs9DU
Jerry StuckleSat, 10 Dec 2016 04:59:30 UTCRe: Stumped on the role of a particular statement in a program with Arrays & Nested For Loopshttps://groups.google.com/d/msg/comp.lang.c/VelgK7gs9DU/W-SAb5vSAQAJ
preferences, >>> most compilers are non-conforming in their default mode. He did not, in any >>> way, imply that they had any obligation to conform in their default mode. >>> >>> You claimed he was wrong about that, and that claim has been the reason for >>> my follow-up messages. > ...https://groups.google.com/d/topic/comp.lang.c/VelgK7gs9DU
Jerry StuckleSat, 10 Dec 2016 04:51:25 UTCRe: Stumped on the role of a particular statement in a program with Arrays & Nested For Loopshttps://groups.google.com/d/msg/comp.lang.c/VelgK7gs9DU/O1vBSmXSAQAJ
to >>>>> satisfy external references to functions and objects not defined in >>>>> the >>>>> current translation. All such translator output is collected into a >>>>> program image which contains information needed for execution in its >>>>> execution environment." >>>>> >>>>> So it says thathttps://groups.google.com/d/topic/comp.lang.c/VelgK7gs9DU
Jerry StuckleSat, 10 Dec 2016 04:47:32 UTCRe: Stumped on the role of a particular statement in a program with Arrays & Nested For Loopshttps://groups.google.com/d/msg/comp.lang.c/VelgK7gs9DU/yQmrzTzSAQAJ
conform >>> in their default mode, but no one has suggested that this violates any >>> requirement of the standard. That's just a straw man argument of your own >>> invention. > ... >> I never said it had to conform by default. ... > > Agreed, and I never claimed that you did. That's ahttps://groups.google.com/d/topic/comp.lang.c/VelgK7gs9DU
Jerry StuckleSat, 10 Dec 2016 04:44:38 UTCRe: absence of maxhttps://groups.google.com/d/msg/comp.lang.c/AWkDRgWybUg/TrBEGTnSAQAJ
In article <o2fu1b$9g0$1...@jstuckle.eternal-september.org>, Jerry Stuckle <jstu...@attglobal.net> wrote: >[snip] > >Once again you show you don't read very well. Quotes from the first >version of K&R in 1972 were long superseded in 1985. The first version of K&R was published in 1978. Thehttps://groups.google.com/d/topic/comp.lang.c/AWkDRgWybUg
Dan CrossSat, 10 Dec 2016 04:44:22 UTCRe: absence of maxhttps://groups.google.com/d/msg/comp.lang.c/AWkDRgWybUg/tYViTdXRAQAJ
So I hit the wrong arrow key again, and ended up reading one of Jerry's posts. In article <o2ej41$mor$1...@jstuckle.eternal-september.org>, Jerry Stuckle <jstu...@attglobal.net> wrote: >On 12/9/2016 7:02 AM, David Brown wrote: >>[snip] >> >> Why are you restricting this to PC's and DOS? Ihttps://groups.google.com/d/topic/comp.lang.c/AWkDRgWybUg
Dan CrossSat, 10 Dec 2016 04:37:14 UTCRe: absence of maxhttps://groups.google.com/d/msg/comp.lang.c/AWkDRgWybUg/F4v8CqnRAQAJ
Oh, I understand what you are saying. Better than you understand ANYTHING I've said. Your "declaration" is pre-ANSI style and only allowed for compatibility. And it shows the exact reason why compilers improved. What happens if foo() actually took two ints, a double and a string? What'shttps://groups.google.com/d/topic/comp.lang.c/AWkDRgWybUg
Jerry StuckleSat, 10 Dec 2016 04:34:03 UTCRe: absence of maxhttps://groups.google.com/d/msg/comp.lang.c/AWkDRgWybUg/6bZKUfTQAQAJ
There was no way they could convert the arguments if the definition wasn't visible. And yes, there was a problem with mutually recursive functions. But even today, those are not that common, and programmers just had to be careful when they did have them. The vast majority of the functionhttps://groups.google.com/d/topic/comp.lang.c/AWkDRgWybUg
Jerry StuckleSat, 10 Dec 2016 04:21:07 UTCRe: absence of maxhttps://groups.google.com/d/msg/comp.lang.c/AWkDRgWybUg/q5rG29jQAQAJ
Once again you have a reading comprehension problem. We were talking about the compilers *I USED*. I did not know every compiler on the market at the time. You need help in learning to comprehend a lot of things. Reading is just one of them. > BTW (and this is for anyone else -- Jerry ishttps://groups.google.com/d/topic/comp.lang.c/AWkDRgWybUg
Jerry StuckleSat, 10 Dec 2016 04:19:09 UTCRe: absence of maxhttps://groups.google.com/d/msg/comp.lang.c/AWkDRgWybUg/_iT9HaHQAQAJ
wrote: >>>>> I am surprised you even consider it a possibility. For one thing it >>>>> goes against the explicit wording of the only language standard around >>>>> at the time (K&R) but, worse, it would produce very fragile code. Just >>>>> taking a function out into a separate translationhttps://groups.google.com/d/topic/comp.lang.c/AWkDRgWybUg
Jerry StuckleSat, 10 Dec 2016 04:15:10 UTCRe: absence of maxhttps://groups.google.com/d/msg/comp.lang.c/AWkDRgWybUg/GTz2fHHQAQAJ
supported >>> it.) >>> >>>>>>>>> You could post a link to a compiler manual that backs up your >>>>>>>>> claim. >>>>>>>>> That way you would not have to make so many irrelevant personal >>>>>>>>> remarks. >>> >>> JERRY points out, some might think quite reasonably, that it's quite >>>https://groups.google.com/d/topic/comp.lang.c/AWkDRgWybUg
Jerry StuckleSat, 10 Dec 2016 04:11:45 UTCRe: absence of maxhttps://groups.google.com/d/msg/comp.lang.c/AWkDRgWybUg/UPw4tE_QAQAJ
links. >>>> >>>> My apologies to you, David. I should have checked more thoroughly. >>> >>> No problem. I consider it a complement that you thought my post was >>> written by Ben! >>> >>>> >>>>> And while my main motivation was to be helpful, I must admit that I >>>>> also wanted tohttps://groups.google.com/d/topic/comp.lang.c/AWkDRgWybUg
Jerry StuckleSat, 10 Dec 2016 04:09:20 UTC